bird bird water foot sun waterpot lasso (egyptian for: "welcome to my blog")
Friday, October 23, 2009
CompuDrew - My college football computer ratings
Do you want to know an intelligent, passionate fan's perspective on college football? Go somewhere else. In the meantime, here is my computer rating system (my next post will be about my completely reasonable playoff proposal--even Lee Corso is appeased).
CompuDrew - Andrew Ishak's computer ratings This rating system is based on team record, strength of schedule (SOS) and conference strength of schedule. Margin of victory is not taken into account. Measurements I threw by the wayside: team honor, perseverance, handsomeness of quarterback, if the team likes to "just win", fight song, things written on eye black.
Here's the formula: ((Winning Pct+1) multiplied by (SOS/2 +1) multiplied by (Conference SOS/8 + 1)) all divided by 0.03
(I divided it by 0.03 to make the system look like it's out of 100; it's easier to digest that way. SOS is 2/3 opponents' winning percentage and 1/3 opponents' opponents' winning percentage.)
You might be asking: How can a conference like the Mountain West have a stronger SOS than the Big 12? At this point, the Big 12 has only had 15 or so in-conference games, and has beat up on Conference USA and FCS opponents, while the MWC has actually faced just as many BCS conference teams as the Big 12 has. As the season progresses, the Big 12 SOS will strengthen quite a bit.
Look for my completely reasonable playoff proposal coming soon.
I was playing with my daughter yesterday with the TV on in the background. I wasn't really paying attention to the screen. Hungry for college football content, I had TiVoed a Texas Longhorns Season Preview on Fox Sports Southwest. They had interviews with coaches mixed with footage of the 2008 season, so I was kind of paying attention when I heard head coach Mack Brown say "stats are for losers."
Yeah, LOSERS with their stupid stats. Losers are always whining about numbers as Sean Connery says in the edited-for-television version of The Rock: "Winners go home and date the prom queen."
My first though was: "stats are for losers" in what context? So I skipped backward to hear more. During the Longhorns' national championship season in 2005, Brown and his coaching staff told Vince Young--a major running threat--to not pass the line of scrimmage at certain times. They wanted him to use his arm, much like they want Colt McCoy to do now. But your quarterback is probably worried about his rushing stats, right?
"We do not care about stats. Stats are for losers. We care about winning the game."
Ah, okay, so it's not that he doesn't care for stats, it's that winning comes first. That's fine. I can see where he is coming from.
I love looking at stats, and I have a good memory when it comes to numbers, so I spend a lot of time thinking quantitatively about life. For instance, I remember that I was a disappointing 12 for 23 in slow-pitch softball this spring, but had 8 hits in 10 at bats in a summer tournament. I played catch with my daughter yesterday and she used her left hand to throw about two-thirds of the time (she is stronger with the left but has more control with the right). I have spent 5 of 11 weekends this summer outside of Texas. Stats help give me a more objective view at what has happened in my life. I have made a baby with 100% of my spouses.
Stats comprise knowledge. They guide our reasoning, and we use them to make decisions, and I believe that to be true for anyone from the highest levels of professional sports to the most successful businesspeople to me trying to improve my free throw percentage in a church league. To take the phrase "stats are for losers" at its face means that only losers use that knowledge.
I don't think Coach Brown meant it like that. I don't make 3.8 million dollars a year (with an additional 1.2 million dollar incentive for still being coach on January 15, 2010), but I do respect Coach Brown greatly so I am going to assume he meant one of two things. Either stats are a way to comfort losers after a loss, or stats are for losers given certain conditions. I will expand on the latter explanation.
Stats are for losers if their statistical goals get in the way of winning. The classic example of the conflict this can cause comes from incentivized salaries in team sports. Suppose Derek Jeter gets a million dollar bonus for ending the season with a .300 batting average or better (3 hits for every 10 at bats). Going into the last game of the season, he has a .300 batting average, having 180 hits in 600 at bats. The opposing pitcher for the game is Scott Kazmir, who Jeter is 4 for 33 (.121) against lifetime. Should Jeter play? If his statistical goal (and the bonus) is most important to him, then most people would say he shouldn't play because he is likely to dip below .300. Of course, Jeter would never do this for a multitude of reasons: he would incur the fans' and media's wrath for one, and Jeter seems like the kind of guy who is confident enough to believe he can get 1 hit in 3 at bats on the last day of the season. But might he be more inclined to look for a walk or sacrifice bunt, two outcomes that do not affect batting average?
Stats are for losers if context and variables are not taken into account. Let's say you move to a new city for a job. Your first few days at work, it has taken you an average of 45 to 60 minutes to get to your desk. So how long will it take you today? Before I even finish asking that question, you have probably processed three or four variables: day of the week, time of day, route, and parking (and, if you work at UT, how willing you are to risk a parking ticket). So let's look at those variables. It's Saturday, it's early afternoon, you'll take the same route, and parking should be easier because less people work on the weekends. But your job is in San Francisco and the Giants are playing an afternoon game. Those variables matter, because now it will take you 75 to 90 minutes. If you just looked at previous stats without thinking about the variables of this event, you would be banging your head against your steering wheel around the time you hit King Street.
This is my biggest frustration with using the points-per-game statistic, both on the individual and team level. Let's say a team leads their league in scoring per game. That's great, but you have to ask two contextual questions. First, who have they played? The opposing team is obviously a huge variable. UC Davis football almost led the country in scoring in 2000 but they were playing Division II teams almost exclusively; did they have a better offense than every Division I team? Second, what is their defense like? The Golden State Warriors were 2nd in the NBA in scoring this past season but it's partially because of a subpar defense that doesn't slow the other team down, therefore giving their own offense more chances and time to score. Points-per-game is a stat without context, which is why I prefer points-per-possession to evaluate teams.
Stats are for losers if they eliminate experience from the decision-making process.* The interesting thing about people who claim to hate stats is that they use them all the time, except they call it "experience" or "gut instinct." When a football coach decides on a running play on 3rd and 5 instead of a pass play, he is doing it for one of a multitude of reasons, but the reason will be based on the X times out of Y that he has seen it work in the past. Coach Brown didn't want Vince Young to run for first downs during particular games because...well, I don't know the reason, but it was probably something like: "Most of the time when we tell Vince it's okay to run, he doesn't look downfield" or "When Vince runs for first downs, he usually tires out too early" or "We are trying to teach Vince to be a better passer" because Coach Brown and his staff know that championship teams almost always have good passers. "Most of the time", "usually", and "almost always" are statistics. They are not precise, but they are statistics in a general form.
And this is why experience matters: we just don't know the numbers. I don't know what Heather wants for dinner tonight, but if I were to have kept stats during the course of our marriage, I would find that she almost always wants to eat out on Saturdays, and she wants Mexican, Thai, or Vietnamese--stats that I technically could have kept but didn't. But who knows how she is feeling today? Maybe when she is tired she tends towards one cuisine or the other. There are an infinite number of variables, some of which we just don't have the tools to measure yet, so we use our own past to fill the gaps. Experience is a substitute for unknown--or unknowable--data.
***
I'm already interested to see how the Longhorns season plays out: I'm a big fan, this should be a great season, and I have students on the team. But now I have another reason: Erin Andrews' halftime interviews with Coach Brown. "Coach Brown, your #1-ranked offense had two turnovers in the first half. How does that stat affect you?" "Erin, you know that as a coach I hate turnovers but I also think stats are for losers. So I think what you mean is: 'Our real good guys had a couple'a whoopsies in the early part goin' on.'"
See? He's still using stats, and I still love Coach Brown.
*Let me say that I don't think experience is not more important than statistical data. The biggest problem with using our own past experiences to understand future events is that we tend to rely only on our own experience. I'll give a personal example. I hurt my ankle a few weeks ago in California and wasn't planning on going to the doctor. See, I hurt my ankle once before doing the exact same thing I was doing this time, and two days later it felt fine, so why go to the doctor now? The problem was that I was relying on my own experience, which is a tiny sample size (n=1), and my own orientation towards getting professional medical help, which I would describe as "reluctant until bleeding".
I neglected two things. First, if I looked at the larger sample size of everyone (and not just experience with my own body), I would have realized that most people who cannot walk on their ankle because of the pain need to seek medical attention. I put my own experience ahead of worldwide medical statistics. Second, I used an experience from when I was younger, neglecting this annoying trend of aging one year for every year that I live. I was 23 when I hurt myself the first time, but now I'm 26. Maybe that's not a big difference, but I'm at the age now where my friends are starting to wear knee braces when we play basketball. The trend of aging probably played into the damage to my ankle this time. This is a very simple example that anyone can follow without a spreadsheet, but it's hard to pull out more complex trends without stats.
The Olympics are over and I'm late to the party but anyway...
I'm waiting for the day when some marketing brain involved in the Olympics comes up with this idea at a meeting: "Hey, why don't we just create new events by making everything synchronized and/or backwards?" I mean really, people, synchronized diving? The triple jump? The breaststroke?
Maybe you think these events have some value at the biggest sporting competition in human history. Hey, maybe you're right. But I think each event has to qualify under one of three criteria, which I'll detail below. I mean seriously, they're giving out medals for being able to jump into a pool the same way another dude can.
There are three reasons we have these unnecessary events in the Olympics: tradition, factions, and marketing; either it's been around since 1904, or someone complained "That's not how we do it in our country", or the IOC realizes that the networks will pay them a lot more money if they can fill up primetime for a full two weeks.
Look at the triple jump, for example. Or the breaststroke. The breaststroke is literally just a slower, different way to swim. It is in no way more valuable than freestyle, the fastest way to get from one side of the pool to the other. The reason the breaststroke is part of the Olympics is because, basically, it was part of the previous Olympics. And hey, if someone set a record in it, we can't just get rid of the event, right? What would the sports historians do? NOT HAVE HISTORICAL CONTINUITY? NOOOOOOO!
And gymnastics is a whole other story...before you think I am about to bash gymnastics, let me say that I love all the events they have (okay, ALMOST all the events - I don't condone putting handles on a horse and doing scissor kicks on it) and I think they demonstrate an amazing level of human beauty. But why determine team, all-around, and individual medals in separate events? They'll do all the team stuff for like three nights, and then the 12 year-olds have to go back out there for another couple nights and do the exact same events, but now it doesn't affect their teammates, only their total score. Then they do it again for each individual event. Why not use the same performance to determine all three scores? Could you imagine the storylines that would play out in the self vs. team plotlines? I understand there are reasons to separate team, all-around, and individual scores, and I'm sure there is some strategy I do not understand. But it takes forever...which I guess is exactly what TV wants.
Here's what I'm proposing: all Olympic competitions must fall under one of the following three categories:
Skill Events: who can do something fastest, strongest, furthest, etc? These events should have real-world application, like running really fast, throwing something far, jumping over something really high, and even running while jumping over something (just not into a puddle--I'm looking at you, human steeplechase).
Games: competitions that humans have created in which you compete against someone else, and there is a winner determined by rules, not judges. Soccer, basketball, badminton: good.
Aesthetic Events: gymnastics, diving, rhythmic gymnastics..things that look pretty that have to be judged to determine a winner
In addition, I propose two more qualifiers: 1) each event has to stand on its own as having a unique purpose (so, see ya later synchronized diving) and 2) each event is reviewed every four years for relevance in either the real world or the sporting world OUTSIDE the Olympics. So that means if in 40 years, the only major diving competition is at the Olympics, the scrap it--the Olympics should be a reflection of popular sport and culture, not a dictator of it (of course, my argument there is pretty illogical because any event at the Olympics will have competition at other levels...basically I just want to get rid of the steeplechase).
Back to swimming: no more "styles" of moving down the pool...either the guy gets to the other end the fastest or he doesn't. The fact is, freestyle is the fastest way to run, and breaststroke is slow so it's basically like racewalking in the pool. If you want to judge on style, then make it a style competition: "oh wow, Piersol gets a 10 for the fluidity of his backstroke." Otherwise, call the event "swimming" and mark out some distances. Yes, Michael Phelps is pretty awesome for getting 8 gold medals. He is clearly the best swimmer in the world. But if they had Backwards Running, Skipping, and Prancing as Track and Field events then Jesse Owens and Carl Lewis might have a bazillion golds, too. No one told Usain Bolt: "This is how you have to run." Of course, no one told him "You can showboat and set world records at the same time", so I'm sure the guy will just do whatever he wants anyway.
Now to those people who say "Yeah! They should be getting rid of baseball (more like lameball!) because it sux and its borrring with a capital B!" I'm not going to argue with you because it's no use, but I do think there should be more team sports in the Olympics. Victories in team sports may be more valuable to national pride than one dude jumping higher than another guy. U.S.A. has the best basketball team in the world, and no one can argue. We won 8 games to prove it. We can all celebrate our basketball success, but frankly when I watch Michael Phelps, I don't sit there saying "YEAH WE'RE THE BEST SWIMMER IN THE WORLD!" I cheer for HIM, not the country.
Now, I almost got emotional seeing his mom celebrating after his first gold medal. But I'm proud FOR him, not WITH him. That's not a bad thing, but it's always been harder for me to get involved in the atmosphere of, say, Tiger Woods or Pete Sampras than in that of the Texas Longhorns or Oakland A's, because there's that old adage of team sports: to root for laundry, the name on the front of the jersey (or side of the helmet).
What was I talking about again? Oh yeah, the Olympics. As Tim Calhoun would say, in summary and in conclusion, the Olympics are awesome but can we cool it with the random historical events that no one would value if it wasn't for tradition? Thanks. See you in four years with hopscotch.
I'm currently writing a paper proposal that hinges on the idea that performing groups (sports teams, army platoons, firefighters) have a different approach to time cycles than other types of groups.
On a slightly related note, this reminds me of a certain time of the year when I was an undergraduate at UC Davis. The beginning of June was always Championship Week--the most action-oriented part of the year for me (even if it is longer than a week-Championship Fortnight doesn't work for me). During that time, we had 1) class finals, I was usually 2) premiering the movie project I had been working on most of the year, the little league teams we coached had their 3) playoff games, and we had our own for 4) intramural softball.
I remember a year in which I premiered The Sphinxters on June 2 (after staying up for 60 hours like a silly undergrad) on the same day as playoffs for men's softball and inner-tube water polo, had a coed IM softball semifinal game on June 3, little league playoff games on June 4 and 6, and an early final on June 7. That's not to say I was busy; rather, the point is that it was time to go big or go home, for lack of a better cliche. Everyone has times like this, where the peaks run together.
In 2008, my Championship Week is happening right now. Our graduate coed softball championship is tomorrow. Our kickball playoff game (and subsequent championship game) is on Friday. Papers are due next week, right before finals and right after the Cuatro de Mayo kickball tournament. And this all comes on the heels of when we celebrate Easter Sunday, a day on which Christ was a champion over death (okay, I didn't have to do much for that one to happen, but it's still very important).
So now's the time to go big or go home! Sack up! This is the time when heroes shine! Put your money where your mouth is and your nose to the grindstone!
I'm so so bad at sports predictions that I really shouldn't be entering March Madness pools and fantasy football leagues and all that stuff...so without further ado, here are my predictions for the 2008 MLB Season!
AL East - Boston AL Central - Detroit AL West - LA Angels AL Wildcard - Cleveland
NL East - Atlanta NL Central - Chicago Cubs NL West - Arizona NL Wildcard - NY Mets
AL Playoffs - LA over Cleveland, Detroit over Boston, LA over Detroit NL Playoffs - Atlanta over Chicago, Arizona over NY Mets, Atlanta over Arizona World Series - LA over Atlanta in 7
My friend Brian wrote me an e-mail this morning to say that our JV football coach, Gary Price, had passed on from this world. Coach Price was very active with students at Monta Vista in other capacities as well; he worked in food service at the school, coached the women's basketball team, even coached baseball before I was in high school. My words will never convey quite as much as what Coach Price taught us personally, but I want to relate a few stories about him that can say a little about the kind of man he was:
1) We were not a very good football team our freshman year. We started off the season with a bunch of losses, and we were losing at halftime to another team (I don't remember which one). Coach Price finished up his halftime speech, and concluded with this: "Alright. We're down 14 to 0. We're gonna come back and win this game, and we're gonna start doing things right!"
That in itself wasn't special; every coach motivates his team in a similar fashion. The difference with Coach Price was that he was relentless in his optimism. Every Thursday, he would tell us: "Alright. We're oh and [however many games we lost]. We're gonna win tomorrow, and we're gonna start doing things right!" Even up until the last game at halftime, when we were 0-9, Coach Price kept a rosy outlook on the season and on life. I always appreciate that worldview, that we can't change what we have done in the past, but what's important is what we do from this point on in our lives.
2) A personal story: I quit the football team my sophomore year the weekend before school started. I hated practice and I didn't see myself playing very much anyway. Coach Price found me in the locker room that Monday and asked me why I quit. He didn't make any promises about playing time (I was a backup on offense and defense), but he said he needed me on the team.
Why would he go out of his way to keep a player who wasn't going to help him that much during the season? I'm not going to make the argument that he did it so a husky 14-year old would understand the idea of commitment, but he taught me something regardless.
3) A fun story: In that freshman football season, when we couldn't win a game, Coach Price gathered us all together one Thursday at the end of practice. We all took a knee on the JV football field, and he started talking to us (and I'm paraphrasing from memory):
"You guys are on the football team. You guys are supposed to be the stars...you're supposed to win. But who's gonna want an oh and nine team? Who wants to date an oh and nine quarterback?
(he looks around, and in the distance he takes note of a few students walking towards the pool, and he cracks a smile)
"See those guys over there? Those water polo boys in their speedos? Those guys are gonna get the girls. Those water polo boys are gonna steal our women!...Shoot! You guys gonna let that happen?"
By this point, the entire team is cracking up, Coach Ray is doubled over, and Coach Price is restraining his smile, trying to keep things light on the eve of our last game. That's my personal lasting image of Gary Price, keeping us in good spirits when we needed it the most.
Thanks Coach Price for all your hard work. May God bless and comfort your family and friends still in this world!
We lost our IM soccer game, if you couldn't tell. That means I can't shave before WSCA this weekend, at which I'm supposed to look vaguely presentable. Technically I have no more intramural games until next week, so I'm going to have to resort to Super Extra Backup Plan B2 Beta 2.0, which is winning the majority of the weekly grad pickup games this Wednesday at 5 pm. That better work out because you don't even want to know what Plan C is. Okay, you probably do: Scrabble against Heather.
If I make a deal with myself in my head, do I have to stick to it? If no one hears it? I can just break off the deal at anytime, right? Question mark? Wilson?
I decided to use an old motivational tool often used sports, and I'm afraid it's going to backfire. Here's the situation: with regards to winning percentage, I'm on probably the worst two-year run I've ever had in organized amateur sports. It's abysmal. 2-7 in PCAL summer basketball. 2-7 in spring basketball. 6-6 in PCAL basketball last year. 1-3 in intramural football (I'm not counting our second win--it was a forfeit). 0-3-1 in IM soccer. and something like 3-5-1 in kickball, which really shouldn't even count (although we did have a championship game for our "A" kickball team, but I played in that game and we lost!).
So in "real" amateur sports, the teams I have played on are 11-26-1 in the last two years. I'm not a math major, but if I consulted one on this he would come to the conclusion that the winning percentage derived from that record is: bad. Not "but there were some good games in there" bad. More like "you should really consider the common link on all those teams" bad.
Now we're entering my favorite season for intramurals: spring, the season of diamond-based sports and allergies. I will be playing at least 3 short-field soccer games, 8 softball games, and a few indoor soccer matches as well. I haven't really put any goals on the season in terms of winning percentage, but I did think to myself: "wouldn't it be funny if the teams I played on went 0-for-the-spring?" I thought I'd have at least make one victory a reason to celebrate, so I decided not to shave until we won our first game. What a motivator I am! I'm like Jack Welch.
I really don't know if my personal motivation has anything to do with 11-26-1, but maybe it does, and that's enough to make me try something different. Unfortunately, I kind of miscalculated the amount of games before the WSCA conference in Denver this weekend, at which I should probably look presentable. Three mistakes on my part: 1) I thought we would have more soccer games before mid-February, 2) I thought I was going to play intramural basketball, which I ended up not doing, and 3) I forgot that we were trying to get a first-week bye for kickball (yes, I would have counted kickball) because some people were going early to WSCA.
So now my face looks like this... ...and we have one game left before WSCA (we lost our first soccer game last week).
I guess my question is not really based on whether I have to keep my promise to myself, but honestly if things like this actually motivate people. I wonder if I am truly going to play differently with the added pressure of the possibility of a hairy face at WSCA, or if I do it because I want to add a little more excitement to the game. You would think wanting to win would be exciting enough!
We'll see how it goes on Tuesday night; I'd imagine Heather might pay off the other team.
Darrell and Becky came up from San Antonio a few weekends ago to run in the 3M Austin Half-Marathon. Many of you may think that is admirable, to run 13 miles. But isn't it more admirable to show up and watch people run? When you could have slept in? No? Okay.
For the record, Darrell and Becky have two small children, so the easiest plan for them was to sleep for a few hours in own home, wake up at 3:30 a.m., drive for two hours, and then run. In honor of them, below is a picture of many tired people crossing the finish line.
The only way I will ever run 13 miles for fun is if you have someone chasing me. Or a steak at the end.
I've decided to live-blog the Super Bowl, as I'm watching the game here at home and I don't think my dad will appreciate my inane comments and questions too much. I'll be talking about the game, the announcing, the commercials, and of course, CBS's predictable use of hip hop songs during montages about Peyton Manning and Rex Grossman. If you are viewing this blog during the game, please hit your refresh button every few minutes. Enjoy! (all times Pacific) __________________________________________________
8:58 pm Pacific - Well, I gotta say that the game delivered more on its hype than the commercials did. Even though the game was sloppy, what with all the turnovers and everything, it kept my attention from start to finish. I'm glad Tony Dungy mentioned his Christian faith in his post-game speech--that type of openness about Christianity on national television (in this case, the most watched event around the world) is welcome anytime to me.
As for the advertising, I would give the best overall Superbowl campaign to CareerBuilder for their "Don't just survive the workweek" spots. That first animated spot for Coke was probably my favorite single commercial. As for the other advertising, I am disappointed that there was not more creative in-game stuff. Actually, off the top of my head, I can't think of a single non-commercial that was creative enough to turn any heads. Maybe it's because CBS is a little more traditional. FOX would have changed the shape of the football during all instant replays to look more like a Coke bottle. Couldn't you just hear Joe Buck saying: "This Super Slo-Mo FoxTrax Instant Replay brought to you by Coke. Coke: Everything Tastes Better With a Coke."
Tim McCarver: "The point of football is to score more points that the other team."
Peace out from my first live-blog.
_________________________________________________
7:00 - Who will be the first Colts player to say: "No one believed in us!"? My guess is Bob Sanders.
6:58 - Congratulations to the Colts, 29-17! I was one Bears TD and one Colts negative safety from getting the score exactly right.
6:56 - Well, this game is pretty much over. Let the Tony Dungy praise commence. If someone poured Gatorade on me, I would drink it.
6:49 - It's stopped raining, and we're approaching the 2-minute warning here and the Colts have a 12-point lead. If the Bears can keep them from running right into the endzone, then they still have a chance. Oh, and Devin Hester has to run it back because their offense has been inept.
6:37 - Our TV just exploded. Figuratively of course. I think we missed a sweet Delay of Game call.
6:30 - Is Rex Grossman trying to make it rain with these super high passes? Because IT'S ALREADY RAINING REX.
6:28 - Phil Simms said that the Colts wanted to put the Bears in a situation that they are not good at, which is coming from behind. Really? It's a good strategy to be winning? Fair assessment, I guess.
6:21 - I really hoped Rex Grossman would play well today so everyone would get off his back, but that was a crappy pass. It was like a Hail Mary to the flats. Colts TD, 28-17, but there's a challenge.
It's close, but the review evidence isn't overwhelming. And my predicition goes out the window. Booger McFarland is happy.
6:11 - Commercial Break: Katie Couric, Pro Bowl, The Masters...three in a row for CBS shows. Probably all in 30 seconds, so I guess that's okay.
6:04 - I think if I was allowed to be an NFL player for a day, I'd be a nose tackle. Offensive playmakers (quarterback, wide receiver, running back) get hit too much--I'd get snapped in half. I could never cut it on the O-Line. I'm not fast enough to play cornerback or linebacker. Nose tackle would be just right, because if I got one sack, or just one tackle, I'd be pretty satisfied.
6:03 - I'm pretty sure Barbaro is rooting for the Colts. Chicago hits a FG, 22-17 Colts. Go Barbaros.
6:01 - I have a good feeling the Bears will do something good with this short field. Could be a tie game going into the 4th quarter.
6:00 - Still waiting for the first John Cougar Mellancamp commercial. This IS our country, by the way.
5:56 - Robert Goulet.
AND AN OLD T-MOBILE COMMERCIAL. COME ON PEOPLE. I'm tuning out when I see these things.
5:52 - Phil Simms just intimated that Dominique Rhodes is a great sixth man. I'm pretty sure Simms played quarterback for the Giants, and I'm almost certain they played with eleven.
5:47 - Rex Grossman looks ridiculous, flopping around, dropping the ball. This Taco Bell thing with the lions saying "Carne Asada" is annoying.
Hey Van Heusen! A clothes ad for a brand I actually wear.
5:46 - Booger just tackled Rex.
5:44 - I wonder if guys change their cleats at halftime so they can have longer spikes.
5:35 - I know this is old news, but how in the world did we ever watch football before Sportvision created that yellow first-down line? I still don't understand the technology behind it. I don't get how it stays in the same place when the camera moves, and how it can appear on top of the grass but behind a green Jets jersey. Someone please explain this to me.
5:21 - There have been A LOT of promos for CBS shows...I would guess about 20 during the first half. I wonder if CBS wanted to reserve all those spots, or if they really couldn't get their asking price for say, 5 more spots. The network has a ton of power in a situation like this; they can embed show promos into the game itself (which they have done a little of, but maybe not enough). A important factor in paying for the rights to an event like this is the ability to promote your own shows, but I wonder if it can be done better in CBS's case.
I wonder how many people will start watching Two and a Half Men because of the commercials. I won't.
5:10 - This is as good a time as any to fold my laundry.
5:05 - Halftime show. I never cared much for Prince, but there is a pretty ridiculous In Living Color skit with Jamie Foxx playing Prince, selling jeans. Find it on YouTube.
From the neck up, with that front-tying headscarf on, Prince looks like he shoud be cleaning someone's house right now. He just looks like he's ready to scrub tile or something.
4:53 - Who's running KPIX exactly? Our reception cut out during the Frito-Lay Black History Month commercial for the first time today. Conspiracy.
4:51 - I'm pretty sure the American Heart Association was telling me to eat another sausage sandwich. I'm very full.
4:42 - I know this is not the point of High Definition (yes, it needs to be capitalized), but inclement weather looks so much cooler in HD. I'm actually kina hoping this rain will turn into snow.
4:38 - Weird replay graphics, but I like them . I never understood why networks don't try out new graphics in earlier playoff games, but I guess most networks want people to go: "oh, I've never seen that before." Of course, using that logic, you could insert a digital Koala Bear onto Joseph Addai's head at the start of every play.
4:36 Non-HD commercial, American Heart Association? That commercial was so unclear on my TV screen that I'm not sure if I'm supposed to exercise more or eat a tub of Crisco.
4:34 - Touchdown, Colts, good extra point, 16-14. Really good game so far.
4:30 - In all seriousness, the "user-created" commercials for Doritos and Chevy disgusted me. Seriously. "Cleanup at the register"? Gross. Stop it.
4:28 - I feel like there have already been 10 punts in this game.
4:26 - Over/Under on people Tank Johnson will shoot if the Bears lose: 1.
4:25 - I now want to drink Bud Light because a white dog got mud splashed on it and now looks like a dalmatian.
4:17 - That animated Coke commercial was pretty awesome. It certainly got my attention without having to resort to showing cleavage (c'mon Go Daddy, you said your commercial was going to be different this year).
4:13 - One year in Davis, Brian and I brought our desktop computers into the living room so we could work while we wached the Super Bowl. I don't even remember who was playing.
4:11 - I'm pretty sure Cedric Benson was lying on the ground because he wanted a rest. He looks sleepy.
4:08 - This game has more turnovers than a pie shop! HiyOOOO! Take that Woody Paige.
3:59 - YES. A commercial with immigrants trying to speak English. That'll get me every time. Bood Light.
3:56 - I've already seen that commercial, Schick! I'm not watching this game to see things I've already seen. Garbage.
3:53 - Is there a better name in football right now than Booger McFarland? Maybe Poopie McGee on the Seahawks...
3:51 - Two fumbles in 15 seconds. It's sloppy in Miami! Shoulda held the game in Buttonwillow.
3:50 - Yes, you did just hear "The Final Countdown" by Europe. Funny FedEx commercial. Except for the fact that there would be gravity on the Moon.
3:47 - Touchdown, Colts! I missed it--Dad asked me to check if the cat had food. I did see that botched X-point though.
3:45 - Dad's prediction:
"31, Colts." "And the Bears?" "Less than 31."
3:43 - Never gave my pick: Colts 27, Bears 24. Or 25.
3:40 - By the way, I'm hoping there will be at least one commercial this year that actually says something awesome about the product, hence justifying the 2.6 million dollars spent. I mean, it's cool to go for the whole irreverent thing, but it doesn't make me want to drink Sierra Mist.
3:39 - Wow. Beard Combover. Fantastic.
3:34 - First Bud Light commercial features physical humor. Got a chuckle out of Dad.
3:30 - Sweet team intros. I like that we get to hear each players' voice.
3:27 - In a roundabout way, Phil Simms agrees with me. On a completely contradictory note, there goes Devin Hester. Touchdown. No one has ever returned the opening kick for 6 in the Super Bowl.
3:24 - The Bears fans seem really excited about winning the coin toss, which is actually not an advantage at all. It's like being happy that your team is first alphabetically.
3:19 - It's unfortunate that miltary flyovers are not that impressive on TV, because they are so exhilarating when you are in the stadium. I've seen a couple live, and they can take your breath away. I think it's because of the timing and spacing precision involved.
3:17 - Dude it's raining all over Billy Joel's piano.
3:14 pm - First commercial break after team introdcutions, and all the commercials are in HD. Very nice. One of them is for that Ghost Rider movie. Not so nice.
I think Charles Barkley did this once with Barney. This video is four years old and I still love it:
In retrospect, I should have paid John 5 bucks to put up shots that I could block easily and made a much more exciting video. He was actually pretty good, too. I might need to refilm this with me wearing a headband.
EDIT: Okay, just to let everyone know, John is practically my cousin and he had a lot of fun doing this. I showed this to some of the parents of the kids I coached in little league and they said that this was basically the exact opposite of me. I guess that's what makes it fun.
We all had a good time at our first basketball practice of the season this last Sunday. And by "we all" I mean "I", and by "our" I mean "my", and by "good time" I mean "I drove 20 minutes each way to shoot around on a shoddy rim by myself when I could have stayed home and used our glass backboard and not even have had to get in my car." That's what I get for scheduling practice in between two NFL playoff games.
On the bright side, the enjoyment/cooking-time ratio of my spaghetti dinner that night was pretty high, so that's good.
Brian and I have been doing some plyometrics the last three weeks and I have been using my Jumpsoles. If you want a full description and sales pitch, you can go to the Jumpsoles website; the best way for me to quickly describe them is that they are weighted platforms that attach to the front of your shoes, and you wear them to increase the workout for your feet and calves.
Maybe your wondering why I'm using Jumpsoles. Well, I'll tell you anyway. There are three things you need to know: 1) I can't jump as high as I'd like to, 2) I'm only 5'9", and 3) jumping high is advantageous in the Sport of Basket Ball. I would love to grow taller but most people stop growing before they turn 24, so I'm not counting on that. I'd also love to invent some sort of basketball game where average-height, small-vertical-leap people have an advantage over tall people. It probably won't catch on.
I've decided to change Point 1, meaning I'd like to be able to jump higher. The Jumpsoles 8-week program supposedly adds 5 to 10 inches to your vertical leap. You should see the testimonials--they are windows into the soul of Caucasian high school basketball players in Ohio. They read like this:
"I decided to use JUMPSOLES before my freshman year in high school. I arrived on campus as the only freshman who could dunk! I was doing WINDMILL DUNKS with my LEFT HAND--and I'm only 5'8" and 14 years old!!! At the first game, after a SWEET BREAKAWAY DUNK, I heard cheers from the crowd: "That white boy can dunk!" My new nickname is Springy Springmeister!"
I'm not gonna fall for these testimonials of people I've never met. Luckily for me, my cousin's friend Symon said that he used Jumpsoles and they DO work. He said he gained about 6 inches on his vertical leap after 8 weeks. Sounds good to me!
Sweet Coptic Basketball Action is only 143 days away, and I do want to improve this year. Yes, I was second in the league in rebounds last season, but my brother was first, and unfortunately he won't be playing with us this year as he'll be married and living on the East Coast. An increased vertical leap will help my shooting as well as my defense. Who knows...with Jumpsoles and a weight loss program, maybe I can write a testimonial:
"I'm 24 and I play in a church basketball league. I was JUST OKAY last season. After using JUMPSOLES, I can do DOUBLE-PUMP LAYUPS now! I did a sweet WNBA-STYLE LAYUP this season and I heard someone in the crowd say 'HE JUST MADE A LAYUP.' Thanks JUMPSOLES!!!!"
